Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/4] net: dp83869: Add RGMII internal delay configuration

[Dan Murphy]

Florian

On 6/2/20 6:18 PM, Dan Murphy wrote:
> Florian
>
> On 6/2/20 6:13 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > On 6/2/2020 4:10 PM, Dan Murphy wrote:
> > > Florian
> > >
> > > On 6/2/20 5:33 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > > On 6/2/2020 9:45 AM, Dan Murphy wrote:
> > > > > Add RGMII internal delay configuration for Rx and Tx.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@xxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > > +
> > > > > ÂÂ enum {
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ DP83869_PORT_MIRRORING_KEEP,
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ DP83869_PORT_MIRRORING_EN,
> > > > > @@ -108,6 +113,8 @@ enum {
> > > > > ÂÂ struct dp83869_private {
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ int tx_fifo_depth;
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ int rx_fifo_depth;
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ s32 rx_id_delay;
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ s32 tx_id_delay;
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ int io_impedance;
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ int port_mirroring;
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂ bool rxctrl_strap_quirk;
> > > > > @@ -232,6 +239,22 @@ static int dp83869_of_init(struct phy_device
> > > > > *phydev)
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ &dp83869->tx_fifo_depth))
> > > > > ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ dp83869->tx_fifo_depth = DP83869_PHYCR_FIFO_DEPTH_4_B_NIB;
> > > > > ÂÂ +ÂÂÂ ret = of_property_read_u32(of_node, "rx-internal-delay-ps",
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ &dp83869->rx_id_delay);
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ if (ret) {
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ dp83869->rx_id_delay =
> > > > > + dp83869_internal_delay[DP83869_CLK_DELAY_DEF];
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ ret = 0;
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ }
> > > > > +
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ ret = of_property_read_u32(of_node, "tx-internal-delay-ps",
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ &dp83869->tx_id_delay);
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ if (ret) {
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ dp83869->tx_id_delay =
> > > > > + dp83869_internal_delay[DP83869_CLK_DELAY_DEF];
> > > > > +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ ret = 0;
> > > > > +ÂÂÂ }
> > > > It is still not clear to me why is not the parsing being done by 
> > > > the PHY
> > > > library helper directly?
> > > Why would we do that for these properties and not any other?
> > Those properties have a standard name, which makes them suitable for
> > parsing by the core PHY library.
> > > Unless there is a new precedence being set here by having the PHY
> > > framework do all the dt node parsing for common properties.
> > You could parse the vendor properties through the driver, let the PHY
> > library parse the standard properties, and resolve any ordering
> > precedence within the driver. In general, I would favor standard
> > properties over vendor properties.
> >
> > Does this help?
>
> Ok so new precedence then.
>
> Because there are common properties like tx-fifo-depth, rx-fifo-depth, 
> enet-phy-lane-swap and max_speed that the PHY framework should parse 
> as well.
I am assuming that the retrieval of the property and getting the index 
should be 2 separate APIs?

One API to get the property value and one API to find the index value.

Dan


> Dan